ADHD & School: Assessing Normalcy in an Abnormal Environment

According to the most authoritative recent data, approximately 8% of children in the United States, aged 4 to 17, have been diagnosed as having ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder).[1] The same reports note that the disorder is about three times as frequent in boys as it is in girls, so this means that roughly 12% of boys and 4% of girls have received the diagnosis. Think of it. Twelve percent of boys--that's approximately one boy out of every eight--has been determined by some clinical authority, using official diagnostic criteria set out by the American Psychiatric Association, to have this particular mental disorder! [Note added in June, 2015. Now things have gotten worse. According to the latest data, now 20% of boys are diagnosed with ADHD at some point in their school career.]

If only teachers' ratings were used, the numbers would be even greater. In one study involving 16 different schools and more than three thousand children, teachers filled out the standard ADHD diagnostic checklist of behaviors for the students in their classrooms.[2] In that study, where teachers' ratings were not averaged in with the ratings made by parents, 23% of elementary school boys and 20% of secondary school boys were diagnosed as having ADHD. What an amazing finding. By teachers' ratings, nearly one fourth of all elementary school boys and one fifth of all secondary school boys has the mental disorder, ADHD!

ADHD is Fundamentally a School Adjustment Problem

What does it mean to have ADHD? Basically, it means failure to adapt to the conditions of standard schooling. Most diagnoses of ADHD originate with teachers' observations.[3] In the typical case, a child has been a persistent pain in the neck in school--not paying attention, not completing assignments, disrupting class with excessive movements and verbal outbursts--and the teacher, consequently, urges the parents to consult with a clinician about the possibility that the child has ADHD. Using the standard diagnostic checklists, the clinician then takes into account the ratings of teachers and of parents concerning the child's behavior. If the ratings meet the criterion level, then a diagnosis of ADHD is made. The child may then be put on a drug such as Adderall or Concerta, with the result, usually, that the child's behavior in school improves. The student begins to do what the teacher asks him to do; the classroom is less disrupted; and the parents are relieved. The drug works.

The diagnostic criteria for ADHD, as outlined by DSM-IV (the official diagnostic manual of the American Psychiatric Association), clearly pertain primarily to school behavior. The manual lists nine criteria having to do with inattention and another nine having to do with hyperactivity and impulsivity. If a child manifests at least six of either set of nine, to a sufficient degree and over a long enough period of time, then the child is identified as having one or another version of ADHD. Depending on which set of criteria are manifested, the child is given a diagnosis of ADHD Predominantly Inattentive Type; ADHD Predominantly Hyperactive-Impulsive Type; or ADHD Combined Type.

Here, for you to peruse, are the complete lists of criteria, quoted directly from DSM-IV:

Inattention

1. Often does not give close attention to details or makes careless mistakes in schoolwork, work, or other activities.
2. Often has trouble keeping attention on tasks or play activities.
3. Often does not seem to listen when spoken to directly.
4. Often does not follow instructions and fails to finish schoolwork, chores, or duties in the workplace (not due to oppositional behavior or failure to understand instructions).
5. Often has trouble organizing activities.
6. Often avoids, dislikes, or doesn't want to do things that take a lot of mental effort for a long period of time (such as schoolwork or homework).
7. Often loses things needed for tasks and activities (e.g. toys, school assignments, pencils, books, or tools).
8. Is often easily distracted.
9. Is often forgetful in daily activities.

Hyperactivity & Impulsivity

1. Often fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in seat.
2. Often gets up from seat when remaining in seat is expected.
3. Often runs about or climbs when and where it is not appropriate (adolescents or adults may feel very restless).
4. Often has trouble playing or enjoying leisure activities quietly.
5. Is often "on the go" or often reacts as if "driven by a motor".
6. Often talks excessively.
7. Often blurts out answers before questions have been finished.
8. Often has trouble waiting one's turn.
9. Often interrupts or intrudes on others (e.g., butts into conversations or games).

OK, after reading this list, who is surprised that so many boys have been diagnosed as having ADHD and that teachers usually initiate the diagnostic process? Raise your hand (but please don't blurt out your answer before I call on you).

How convenient that we have this official way of diagnosing kids who don't sit still in their seats, often fail to pay attention to the teacher, don't regularly do the assignments given to them, often speak out of turn, and blurt out answers before the questions are finished. They used to be called "naughty"--sometimes with a frown, sometimes with a smile of recognition that "kids will be kids" or "boys will be boys"--but now we know that they are, for biological reasons, mentally disordered. And, wonder-of-wonders, we even have an effective treatment. We can give them a powerful drug--a preparation of methylphenidate or amphetamine, both of which have effects on the brain similar to those of cocaine (but without the euphoria) and are, for good reasons, illegal to take unless you have been diagnosed with a mental disorder and given a prescription. The drug works. The children become more tractable and classroom management becomes easier.[4]

The most common subtype of ADHD is the Predominantly Inattentive Type. This is the disorder that used to be called just ADD. A highly respected pediatrician at Yale University who treats (with drugs) many children diagnosed with this disorder made this interesting confession: "A disproportionate number of children labeled ‘ADHD without hyperactivity' are exceptionally bright and creative children. I've often thought that these kids find their own inner theater much richer and more interesting than the outer theater of the classroom and, so, naturally, focus on it at the expense of classroom attention. . . The proper fix for this problem would be done at the school level, a place where I am unlikely to have any significant effect. I can, however, help these children concentrate and return their attention to the classroom."[5]

Why Do So Many Kids Have Difficulty Adjusting to School?

From an evolutionary perspective, school is an abnormal environment. Nothing like it ever existed in the long course of evolution during which we acquired our human nature. School is a place where children are expected to spend most of their time sitting quietly in chairs, listening to a teacher talk about things that don't particularly interest them, reading what they are told to read, writing what they are told to write, and feeding memorized information back on tests. As I have detailed in previous essays, during the entire course of human history until very recently, children were in charge of their own education. They learned by following their own inner, instinctive guides, which led them to ask countless questions (their own questions, not someone else's), to converse with others as equal partners, to explore their world actively, and to practice the skills crucial to their culture through self-directed play in age-mixed groups. [See Children Educate Themselves II: The Wisdom of Hunter-Gatherers.]

From my evolutionary perspective, it is not at all surprising that many children fail to adapt to the school environment, in ways that lead to the ADHD diagnosis. All normal children have at least some difficulty adapting to school. It is not natural for children (or anyone else, for that matter) to spend so much time sitting, so much time ignoring their own real questions and interests, so much time doing precisely what they are told to do. We humans are highly adaptable, but we are not infinitely adaptable. It is possible to push an environment so far out of the bounds of normality that many of our members just can't abide by it, and that is what we have done with schools. It is not surprising to me that the rate of diagnosis of ADHD began to skyrocket during the same decade (the 1990s) when schools became even more restrictive than they had been before--when high-stakes testing became prominent, when recesses were dropped, when teachers were told that they must teach to the standardized tests and everyone must pass or the teachers themselves might lose their jobs.

Schools' Intolerance of Normal Human Diversity

Why do some kids adapt to school better than do others? The answer to that does lie in biology--normal biology, not abnormal biology. For good evolutionary reasons, members of our species vary genetically in ways that create diversity in personality.[6] People have always lived in communities, and communities--as well as the individuals within them--benefit from diversity. It is good that some people are relatively restrained while others are more impulsive, that some are relatively passive while others are more active, that some are cautious while others are bolder, and so on. These are among the dimensions that make up normal personality. In situations where people are free, they find ways of behaving and learning that fit best with their biological nature, and through those means they make unique contributions to the communities in which they live. Normal human environments always have a variety of niches that people can occupy, and people who are free naturally choose niches where they are most comfortable and happy, the niches that match best with their biological nature.

But school, especially today, does not have a variety of niches. Everyone is expected to do the same thing, at the same time, in the same way. Everyone must pass the same tests. Some people, apparently most, have a personality that allows them to adapt sufficiently well to the school environment that they pass the tests and avoid behaving in ways that the teachers can't tolerate. School may take its toll on them, but the toll is not so obvious. The toll may manifest itself as diffuse anxiety, or moderate depression, or cynicism, or suppression of self-initiative and creativity; but the school system can absorb all that. Those characteristics become viewed as "normal." Unless they become really extreme, they don't get DSM-IV diagnoses. It's the kids whose personalities do not allow them to go along with the system who get the ADHD diagnoses. And most of those are boys.

One of the biological characteristics that predisposes for ADHD in the school environment, obviously, is the Y chromosome. For evolutionary reasons, boys are, on average, more physically active, more adventurous (in the sense of taking risks), more impulsive, and less compliant than are girls. A normal distribution of such traits exists for both boys and girls. The distributions overlap considerably, but are not identical. The cutoff on the distribution that gets you a diagnosis of ADHD in our present society happens to be at a point that includes about 12% of boys and 4% of girls. In another setting, where they could choose their niches, most of those kids would do just fine.

An Illustrative Story

I'll conclude with a true story to illustrate all this. It pertains to a young man whom I have known well since he was thirteen years old. Throughout his school years he was funny, playful, extraordinarily impulsive, and a huge pain in the neck to essentially all of his teachers. He rarely completed a school assignment and was constantly disruptive in class. He truly could not focus on any of his school lessons and he seemed unable to prevent himself from saying what was on his mind rather than what he was supposed to say. His parents were regularly called in for conferences. When school officials asked his parents to take him to a clinic for ADHD diagnosis, his mother--a physician who knew that the long-term brain effects of the drugs used to treat ADHD have never been tested in humans and have proven deleterious in laboratory animals--refused to do so. The boy had all the characteristics of ADHD Combined Type, and I have no doubt that he would have received that diagnosis had his mother consented. Thanks to a relatively lenient and understanding assistant principal, he was passed along from grade to grade, even though he did almost none of the assigned work and failed most of his tests. He graduated from high school at the bottom of his class.

Then the good part of his life began. Clearly unfit for college, he did a year in an internship program and discovered that he enjoyed cooking and was good at it. After working in a restaurant for a while, he received recommendations that got him into a culinary school, where he loved the work and excelled. Now, at the age of 22, he has an excellent job as assistant to the chef in a very busy, very successful restaurant. In this setting, which requires constant, active, hands-on work and the kind of mental brilliance that involves attending to and responding to many competing and immediately demanding sources at once, he shines. He has found his niche. He learned nothing from his 13 years of public schooling, but, because of his buoyant personality, school did not destroy him. When he was finally out of school, free to pursue his own interests in the real world, he found his niche and now is thriving there. The real world, thank goodness, is very different from school.

Experiences of ADHD-Labeled Kids Who Switch from Conventional Schooling to Homeschooling or Unschooling

----------Notes
*Some hyperlinks in these posts are automatically generated and may or may not link you to sites that are relevant. Author-generated links are distinguished from automatic ones by underlines.
[1] For ADHD prevalence data, see: Vissar et al. (Feb., 2007), Pediatrics 119, S99-S106; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Sept. 2, 2005), "Mental health in the United States: Prevalence of Diagnosis and Medication Treatment for ADHD," MMWR: Morbitidy and Mortality Weekly Report 54, 842-846; and Mayes et al (2009), Medicating Children: ADHD and Pediatric Mental Health (Harvard University Press), p 2.
[2] Nolan et al. (2001), Teacher reports of DSM-IV ADHD, ODD, and CD symptoms in schoolchildren. Journal of the Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40, 241-249.
[3] See Mayes et al., p 4.
[4] In order to make ADHD not appear to be just a school problem, DSM-IV adds the stipulation that the symptoms must be seen in at least one other setting, not just in school. However, it does not stipulate that the other setting has to be radically different from school. It is easy to see how parents, after being convinced that their child has ADHD from the school reports, might "see" such symptoms at home or in another setting--especially while doing homework, or when involved in some adult-directed activity such as lessons or formal sports outside of school. Nevertheless, the failure of these symptoms to manifest themselves so much in settings outside of school probably explains why rates of ADHD diagnoses based just on teacher reports are so much higher than those based on a combination of teachers' and parents' reports.
[5] Sidney Spiesel, quoted by Mayes et al., p 12.
[6] For a documented discussion of the evolutionary foundation for diversity in personality in humans and other species see P. Gray (2010), Psychology, 6th Edition, pp 560-570.

I've always doubted that the people who wrote the official diagnostic list for ADHD were very knowledgeable about giftedness, because many traits of ADHD and giftedness are similar. And if they were knowledgeable about giftedness, they unfortunately managed to craft language that's wide open for diagnostic error by an untrained eye.

Anonymous, thanks for your comment. I don't know what these people knew or didn't know about giftedness. One fact that has come out about them, though, is that 13 of the 21 individuals who were on that panel had direct financial ties to pharmaceutical companies that market the drugs used to treat ADHD. I doubt if they were interested in giftedness, because so far there's been no demand to treat that condition with drugs. :) -Peter

Merck hasn't invented a pill to "cure" giftedness yet. When they do, you'll see the criteria and their pill as the next miracle cure in the DSM.

As to who wrote it, well, that was a couple of shrinks and the drug company honchos. I used to work with one of them.

Back in the day it was *hyperkenetic" which wasn't as impressive as using an acronym.

Nor would selling it under its actual name, Methylphenidate, or the original brand name of MPH. Much too close to METH! Can't convince Molly Homemaker to give her kid Meth but come up with a fancy acronym and a new name, Ritalin, and bingo, money, money, money.

Do people really think the incidence of ADHD/ADD has gone up 500% since 1991? Do people really think that kids in the U.S. are 85% more likely to have ADHD/ADD than kids in other industrialized countries?

Well, the scripts for Ritalin have gone up 500% and the U.S. consumes 85% of all Ritalin.

Surely folks remember the phrase "follow the money." It is appropriate in this case!

For those who aren't in the medical field, the coding of diseases is actually a book of opinions and frequently has little or nothing to do with anything except a new drug that Merck and the boys want to sell. "The" book sends out a request each year or two for *suggestions* for the next book. All ya have to do is think up a new disease, describe it, have a prognosis and a possible cure and bingo you're in the book.

That's what I discovered. You're exactly right. If I remember correctly, Ritalin was developed for something else, didn't work or produced unacceptable side effects, so the drug company had a billion dollar drug on its hands that it couldn't sell. The American Psychiatric Association obligingly concocted an excuse for its application.

One cannot know a tiger in a zoo, one cannot memorize how to play the violin and expect that ' education' to enable a person to suddenly step outside the box, the zoo, and be able to perform. This is why accelerated learning techniques all involve total physical engagement of all the senses. The math is right in front of us. In a school a child memorizes a story, a sequence of info describing events, that info because a ' rubber band' of info, limited and stretched out, rolled into a ' seed' and used to direct the child/human/man. Naturally, that train of info, is not enough to direct the child in reality effectively, and it was a process that took a natural ability to focus AWAY from a natural ability to focus on the PRACTICAL, the practice of living in space, the space of HERE! The consequence of this design, is the creation of attention disorders becoming more and more prevalent . There is a reason, the math of seven generations ( of info) visits the subsequent generations! There are tools to correct this, as it must be walked in physical space, to ensure that the overall mis-takes never happen again. THis is the git of life, inherent in the design of creation and the use of that means, as real physical engagement of all natural sensibiilty,

I agree with much of this. I would however, urge you to look beyond schools since they merely reflect community expectations. If you want to change the eductaional system schools therefore, are not the place to start. Change the community and the schools will follow along.
I would also question how widely applicable your data might be. 16 different schools that were all in the same system would hardly be a representative sample. I teach in Australia where we have a wide variety of schools and even within a single high school there are many paths a student can take. Your young man would no doubt have enjoyed our hospitality program withn its heavy emphasis on practical skills.
For whatever reason I would also observe that teachers here, rather than suggesting ADHD diagnoses, have often been reluctant to accept them. My experience is that parental anxiety about under-achievement and/or misbehaviour, in and out of school, is often the driving force in ADHD diagnosis.
Finally it takes no great talent to identify faults with schools and the concept of schooling. Coming up with a viable alternative that was acceptable to the wider community, as opposed to a priveleged elite, would be the real achievement. I have taught in many schools in a wide variety of social settings but I don't think I have yet encountered a group of parents who would be happy to let their children educate themselves, though I agree that in many cases they would do a better job than schools.

1. I agree with you that we must look beyond schools. In fact, that is exactly what I am trying to do with my series of essays on this blog and some of my other writing, which is addressed to the general community. But we have a long way to go.

2. I think the data I referred to are pretty widely applicable. The 16 schools in the study I referred to came from different school districts, some in New York, some in Wisconsin, some in Missouri, deliberately selected in a way to provide geographical and socioeconomic diversity. Also, other studies--even in other countries--cited by this article and by the Mayes et al (2009) book that I refer to have found very similar results when teachers' ratings alone are used to diagnose ADHD.

3. I'm glad to hear that schools in Australia have not taken the route that US schools have of narrowing the pathways and making expectations and demands uniform.

4. I agree that coming up with viable options to standard schooling is the real achievement. If you look through my previous posts you will find many that are concerned with exactly that.

the DSM has a wide variety of behaviours that i consider beneficial in settings other from school, such as out in nature, these impulses might just save your life out there, so the DSM is highly stereotypical as kids always perform these actions outside of school, just more things to show that we are not made for an enviroment like school.

the DSM has a wide variety of behaviours that i consider beneficial in settings other from school, such as out in nature, these impulses might just save your life out there, so the DSM is highly stereotypical as kids always perform these actions outside of school, just more things to show that we are not made for an enviroment like school.

One cannot know a tiger in a zoo, one cannot memorize how to play the violin and expect that ' education' to enable a person to suddenly step outside the box, the zoo, and be able to perform. This is why accelerated learning techniques all involve total physical engagement of all the senses. The math is right in front of us. In a school a child memorizes a story, a sequence of info describing events, that info because a ' rubber band' of info, limited and stretched out, rolled into a ' seed' and used to direct the child/human/man. Naturally, that train of info, is not enough to direct the child in reality effectively, and it was a process that took a natural ability to focus AWAY from a natural ability to focus on the PRACTICAL, the practice of living in space, the space of HERE! The consequence of this design, is the creation of attention disorders becoming more and more prevalent . There is a reason, the math of seven generations ( of info) visits the subsequent generations! There are tools to correct this, as it must be walked in physical space, to ensure that the overall mis-takes never happen again. THis is the git of life, inherent in the design of creation and the use of that means, as real physical engagement of all natural sensibiilty,

"What does it mean to have ADHD? Basically, it means failure to adapt to the conditions of standard schooling."

Woah there! I think that a weighty statement like this needs some real discussion and more importantly, honesty.

In your eagerness to blame schools for ADHD diagnoses, you conveniently omit to mention that the ADHD symptoms must also:

# continue for at least six months.
# create a real handicap in at least two areas of the child’s life, (for example, "in school AND at home", or "at home AND in the community setting", or "in social settings AND at school")
# "differential diagnosis" is mandatory, to examine underlying causal factors. Teachers do not arbitrarily decide ADHD diagnoses!

You also forget to mention that most people exhibit some of the ADHD criteria, "but not to the degree where such behaviors significantly interfere with a person's work, relationships, or studies".

You crucially omit the fact that ADHD behaviours and symptoms are "remarkably consistent across populations and genders"

You also omit, in your anti-school fog, to talk about the estimated 4.7% of adults in the US living with ADHD.

http://www.continuingedcourses.net/active/courses/course034.php

So clearly ADHD is not specifically "standard school" related. Please could you clarify, are you suggesting that ADHD is not a psychiatric disorder that also affects adults?

Also, could you tell us how many children with ADHD you have interviewed? Or parents of children with ADHD have you interviewed? Or child psychiatrists diagnosing ADHD you have interviewed?

I'm guessing (knowing your contempt of facts, and your genral reluctance to conduct real research into your wacky pronouncements), that the answer is, VERY PROBABLY, NONE

I am fascinated that you feel the need to blame the ADHD diagnoses on the teachers (rather than, say, the psychologists or drugs companies) You say "By teachers' ratings, nearly one fourth of all elementary school boys and one fifth of all secondary school boys has the mental disorder, ADHD!"

Yet the teachers are simply filling out a questionnaire, aren't they? It is the constructors and interpreters of the questionnaire who are in fact creating the parameters of the mental disorder. The teachers are only responding to the questions and stating facts as they see them pertaining to their lessons.

I am not surprised that a young boy might present with more of the psychologist's criteria for ADHD when in a group of 30 than when alone with a parent, are you?

Anyway, I see you're back to your old tricks of telling lies about schools as well. You say:

"School is a place where children are expected to spend most of their time sitting quietly in chairs, listening to a teacher talk about things that don't particularly interest them, reading what they are told to read, writing what they are told to write, and feeding memorized information back on tests"... "Everyone is expected to do the same thing, at the same time, in the same way."

This is a lie, Peter. You are misinforming people who read your blog. You are not giving them the truth about schools. You are abusung your position as a research professor, to deliver your anti-school propaganda.

Why don't you just go into a school, any school? The picture you are blindly painting is not truthful. Stop spouting lies about schools and go into one.

Please Peter, go into some schools and watch what goes on. Conduct some real scientific research and make some objective observations for a change. Publish real research on here rather than biased opinion.

You and your readers may be pleasantly surprised at how much interaction, movement and ownership of lessons kids have in school. But you will never be able to speak truthfully about it until you actually condescend to go in and look into a real classroom for yourself.

Do it today, call a few schools up, and ask if you can go in and observe a few lessons. Observe for yourself what percentage of time that kids "spend sitting quietly on chairs listening to teachers", for example.

I estimate I spend 10% of my lessons on average in what is called teacher-led activity. About 70% of my class interaction is peer group orientated, with small group to whole group at about 10% and student to whole group at about 10%.

You seem upset that this post places a lot of blame on the teachers. I agree that there is a lot of blame to spread around.

Do you think there is any validity to the idea that there is an over-diagnosis problem in regards to ADHD?

I've seen a lot from many sides but all of it is anecdotal. As one involved in homeschooling for nearly 20 years, I've seen many, many families whose children were diagnosed with ADHD suddenly have no problems at all once they took the kid out of institutionalized schooling. How would you explain that?

I worked in a private reading clinic for 8 years too and many of those kids were diagnosed as well. Yet, it just seemed to me the vast majority of them just had one "problem": they were active curious kids who simply required more energy to nurture and raise as well as being interested in other things than what the school decided they needed to learn at that specific point in time.

As I observed families in both of these situations, what I noticed most was how these kids were just like my son in many, many ways. But he was fortunate enough to be taken out of the stifling environment of institutional school and given the freedom to learn in his own way. It worked beautifully. I can't prove it to you, but I totally and completely believe he would have been sent off to the doctors and tested for ADHD if we had kept him in school. (He was taken out in the second month of his first grade year.)

One more point I always found interesting: I don't know what to think about the many families I've met who did not give their kids drugs during the summer vacations because their kid only "needed them" during the time they had to go to school.

Why yes, I appear to have taken up the opposite angry polemic to Peter's angry Polemic against schools! My apologies for coming across as grumpy. You just have to imagine me speaking in a friendly tone of voice! There's nothing personal, I'm just trying to provide some balance and stop Peter from getting away with some of his less honest statements.

I couldn't tell you about over-diagnosis of ADHD, though personally I don't feel comfortable with the thought of so many kids on drugs. I do, however, know that many kids find it helpful to be on ritalin, etc, and many parents I have spoken to have talked positively about their child's medications, once the right one has been found.

You ask

"I've seen many, many families whose children were diagnosed with ADHD suddenly have no problems at all once they took the kid out of institutionalized schooling. How would you explain that?"

I would explain it by saying that a disorder involving chronic inattention and lack of motivation poses much less of a problem to a homeschooled child in a group of one than to a schooled child in a group of 25. School generally requires more focus and presents with more distractions.

Although most schools have coping mechanisms for ADHD kids, children with ADHD are probably better served by the one-to-one attention and personal freedom that homeschool can afford, IMO.

Also, as you suggest, ADHD may well have been misdiagnosed. But just to clarify, contrary to Peter's inferences, teachers cannot and do not make diagnoses. The following professionals can diagnose and treat ADHD:

The Psychiatrist, The Psychologist, Your Family Doctor, The Neurologist, The Master Level Counselor, The Social Worker.

Not teachers or schools. Peter has actually spread some really dangerous misinformation about ADHD in his post.

ADHD is not a school-specific problem. It is not just about naturally energetic kids challenging teacher authority (though he is desperate to lay the blame at teachers' feet). Experienced teachers
should really know the difference between an naturally energetic kid and one who has a genuine hyperactivity problem, and they should know how to interact with both.

ADHD is a real and serious, often debilitating condition. It is not simply about naughty kids in school. Please check out this article, which details how genuine ADHD sufferers have "deficits in the brain's reward system"

http://www.bnl.gov/bnlweb/pubaf/pr/PR_display.asp?prID=998

I am not sure what to make of those families you know of "who did not give their kids drugs during the summer vacations because their kid only needed them during the time they had to go to school."

I can only say that this situation clearly does not match with the diagnosis criteria of ADHD appearing for longer than 6 months, and in more than one area of a child's life.

Sorry I can't answer any better, but perhaps you can get an honest and accurate answer here if you ask tham the same question:

http://www.addforums.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=38

Perhaps also Peter would like to invite some genuine parents of kids with genuine ADHD diagnoses to post on this forum. I think it could help maintain an air of truthfulness and objectivity.

"I would explain it by saying that a disorder involving chronic inattention and lack of motivation poses much less of a problem to a homeschooled child in a group of one than to a schooled child in a group of 25. School generally requires more focus and presents with more distractions."

Aren't you basically conceding the main point of Peter's article, that ADHD can just as easily been seen as a problem with the environment as a problem with the kid? In other words, if kids aren't meeting expectations, shouldn't we be asking whether there's something wrong with the expectations before we assume there's something wrong with the kids (and start medicating them all)?

Your entire comment (which yes, did sound awfully grumpy) has this same feel to it. You're throwing a lot of accusations at Peter, but you're not really disputing his central points: if kids can do fine (or better) without all the coercion involved in compulsory schooling, how do you justify the coercion? I'm not saying he's necessarily right; I'm saying you're not contradicting his central points.

"Aren't you basically conceding the main point of Peter's article, that ADHD can just as easily been seen as a problem with the environment as a problem with the kid?"

No, I think Peter has spread some dangerous misinformation. It's not, as he suggests, just a question of naturally exuberant kids acting up in class. It is a physical condition it impacts seriously in all areas of their life, not just school or work.

It is Peter's central myth that school is "coersive" that I am trying to dispell.

I think in this case the best thing to do would be to talk to some genuine ADHD sufferers, and get their perspectives.

I invite you to go into a school and talk to the SEN teachers, and ask about their individual education plans, and see for yourself the one-to-one support, or visit an ADHD kid in one of the Learning Centres there.

Most of all talk to genuine kids and genuine parents.

Do not believe Peter's misinformation. He is not an expert on ADHD, he has not researched ADHD or been into state schools to see how it is provided for.

It still seems to me that you are avoiding the issues Peter is raising. I can't speak for Peter, but I know that it is possible to believe that some kids have a serious problem that needs medical treatment, while still believing that the problem is way overdiagnosed because of the pressures put on kids to comply with the expectations imposed by school. (As Peter points out and everyone agrees with, behavioral patterns occur on a normal curve.)

Again, assuming Peter's figures are right (and you haven't disputed them), you have basically conceded that our schools are structured so that 13% of American boys would be better off home-schooled. That still strikes me as an awfully big concession. The main point of Peter's article is if that, before we diagnose that large a portion of the population with a mental disorder, maybe we should ask whether there's something wrong with the expectations we're expecting kids to meet, and not with the kids. You continue to remain entirely silent about this main point of Peter's post.

And it's a "myth" that school is coercive? We're talking about compulsory schooling, after all. Do you give your students the option of not attending your class? Honestly, when you say that it's a myth that school is coercive, you just come across like someone who is incapable of understanding Peter's points at all -- someone who's so ensconced in the conventional school bubble that you can't even imagine anything different.

Your posts are long but they aren't saying anything other than "Peter's wrong; if you knew what I knew you'd disagree with him." Those aren't arguments, and they don't add anything to the discussion. Why don't you actually make an argument about the points that Peter (and his commenters) are making?

You could start by explaining why you believe that compulsory schooling is somehow voluntary (as opposed to coercive), and why we should not scrutinize our expectations when so many children fall short of them.

"you have basically conceded that our schools are structured so that 13% of American boys would be better off home-schooled"

I believe that most kids would be better off homeschooled, were they all to have parents who could show some interest in their education.

"The main point of Peter's article is if that, before we diagnose that large a portion of the population with a mental disorder, maybe we should ask whether there's something wrong with the expectations we're expecting kids to meet, and not with the kids."

I agree entirely.

"And it's a "myth" that school is coercive?"

Yes it is. Nobody is forced to attend school (unschooling is legal in all states of USA, for example). No PE teacher can force a child to exercise against their will, no maths teacher can force a child to do homework, no principal can force a child to remove items of clothing.

It is Peter who is so esconced in his bubble that he cannot imagine anything different. There are good schools and good teachers, and children generally enjoy school (50% in the survey discussed on a couple of articles back profess to liking school "all the time" and "many times".

I hope this post goes some way to clarifying my stance on the questions you asked.

We're getting somewhere. But to say that nobody is forced to attend to school is plainly false. (Please identify the state that allows the child to decide whether or not he or she attends school.) It's easy to define coercion in such a way that nothing short of compulsion at gunpoint would qualify. But I don't think most people understand the term that way, and it's clear that Peter is not using it that way, so, again, you are not responding to the actual points that Peter is making.

I don't know what grade you teach -- but are detentions given in your school system? Are children disciplined for failure to obey the school rules? If the answer is yes, then your school system is coercive. You can defend the coercion, but you can't deny that it's there.

For what it's worth, I never experienced gym class (or any other class, for that matter) as voluntary on my part. Now you tell me!

You're right, the state demands that a child receives an education. Please check out this UK article for homeschoolers

http://www.education-otherwise.org/Legal/SummLawEng&Wls.pdf

however, the school does not force the child to enroll. And the child's universal human rights are not magically dispelled when inside school. Here's wiki definition of coersion:

"Coersion is the practice of forcing another party to behave in an involuntary manner, by use of threats, intimidation, trickery, or some other form of pressure or force"

Hmmm... no coersion goes on in my lessons. Plenty of persuasion, but no coersion. I'm not unique in this. And most children I know weigh up the pros and cons of their own education, and understand that it is in their best interests. Schools do an awful lot in their power to try and accommodate children as individuals- not always possible on tight resources, finances etc. But don't fall for the guff about schools being coersive.

Please don't think me petty, but I've discussed this to death on previous threads, can we stick to the ADHD question here?

Do you understand what I mean when I say you are playing semantic games? It is certainly ironic for you to be calling Peter a liar and then stating that "nobody is forced to attend school." Again, what would it take for you to concede that someone is forced to do something? Is it only when a stronger person literally drags them into the building? If that's your definition, then yes, we all agree with you, and you win. Then the rest of us will go and talk about actual *substantive* differences in the degree to which adults are pressuring (manipulating? persuading? cajoling? Use any word you like, Steve!) children into complying with the adults' wishes. Maybe someday you'll actually join that conversation, but until you acknowledge such differences exist, you won't be able to contribute anything valuable to it. In the meantime, your continued refusal to acknowledge what Peter is actually saying will naturally make some people think that you don't have any real rebuttal to it.

I'll continue this discussion down below so that we're all in one place.

I strongly disagree that "no one is forced to go to school" - actually they are. All children must be in school until the are at 16 years old in every state. Most parents don't have the time, support or financial backing to offer homeschooling as an option to their kids.
I don't think Peter wasn't saying all schools are awful, and that all teachers are to blame. What he is saying, is that schools as they are being run right now are not a good fit for all children, and they don't really prepare children who do have "outside the norm" requirements (whether ADHD or giftedness) with the tools they need to create a life for themselves. Many of these children come to see school as place where they learn nothing more than to sit down and shut up.

As for the statement "no principal can force a child to remove items of clothing" - I think you'll find several law suits around the country that prove you wrong. From "gang colors" to "offensive t-shirts" to religious emblems or simply hats & headwear, principals can make you remove articles of your clothes. In some cases if you are suspected of having drugs, they can even strip search you. This happened in my High School.
As for the PE teacher comment, you clearly never had a PE teacher who told you "drop and give me 20", because you didn't run fast enough, catch enough pop flys or "try hard enough".
And while a Math teacher can't force you to do the homework, they can fail you, and make you take the class again, and again until you finally eke out a D.

"I don't think Peter wasn't saying all schools are awful, and that all teachers are to blame. What he is saying, is that schools as they are being run right now are not a good fit for all children, and they don't really prepare children who do have "outside the norm" requirements (whether ADHD or giftedness) with the tools they need to create a life for themselves."

As a teacher, I understand that completely, and I agree with you. However, please take some time to look back over some of Peter's posts about school prisons, coersion, all kids doing the same thing, etc. Look at some of the pictures he uses.

If he were only saying what you have summarised, I would be quite happy. However, he has frequently gone much further than this, repeatedly denegrating schools and teachers, with no intention of actually going into schools to find out.

I think that this time he has gone a bit too far, especially seeking to blame schools for ADHD. Happily, it looks like one or two real parents of kids with ADHD will be giving him a little reality check.

I don't believe that Peter is blaming all cases of ADHD on schools. I think what he is saying is that many kids have trouble with the school format, and that trouble is often labeled ADHD. I think he is fairly generous with the blame and much of it he lays squarely on the writers of the DSM-IV checklist.

Kids who truly have ADHD won't necessarily get better when they are pulled from school or even sometimes after months of drug therapy. In fact my adult friends who have ADHD are so reliant on schedule and routine that losing a job or even going on vacation can create huge amounts of stress, and total inability to function.

So if there are kids who do see improvement based on removal from school or other such "simple" interventions, we could posit the theory that maybe they didn't have ADHD at all. Maybe they weren't properly diagnosed to begin with.

Coerce: "To force to act or think in a certain way by use of pressure, threats, or intimidation; compel."

So, yes, the public school system is coercive. And, yes, children are forced to attend school. You do know about truancy and truancy laws, do you not?

You do know that not everyone feels they are capable of homeschooling, do not have unlimited funds and thus are left with no option except public school.

Can a teacher physically force a child to participate in P.E.? No. Can they apply coercive means? You betcha! It is called expolusion. It is called demerits. It is called a failing grade and having to repeat the class. It is called letters and phone calls to parents with threats against the parent of legal action.

Your example referencing unschooling is a tad on the disingenuious side. Homeschooling is legal in all states. It is near impossible in some states. And in those states, such as New York, the state has taken unschoolers to court and forced their children back into public school. Can you unschool in all states? Sure, if you are cleaver and spend a whole bunch of time lying and cheating. Even you generic school-at-home type homeschooling can be difficult in some states.

So, please don't use unschooling as an excuse to prop up your argument for public schooling.

Your assertion that school isn't coercive because all 50 states recognize some form of unschooling as legal strikes me as an absurd misdirection. Was service in the war in Viet Nam coercive? After all, conscientious objection was a *legal* alternative.

But substantively, I'm blown away by how different your opinion of schools is from my own. While I've attended and worked in more than a dozen different schools, I'm curious if we are drawing such different conclusions because the schools you are basing your conclusions on are very different from the ones I know.

So, here's a challenge to both of us. You name a public school. I'll visit and see if I can spot coercion there. I'll name a public school and you do the same. I'll start with the first school I worked at: Southwestern High School on Font Hill Avenue in Baltimore.
I look forward to your reply.

"you have basically conceded that our schools are structured so that 13% of American boys would be better off home-schooled"

I believe that most kids would be better off homeschooled, were they all to have parents who could show some interest in their education.

"The main point of Peter's article is if that, before we diagnose that large a portion of the population with a mental disorder, maybe we should ask whether there's something wrong with the expectations we're expecting kids to meet, and not with the kids."

I agree entirely.

"And it's a "myth" that school is coercive?"

Yes it is. Nobody is forced to attend school (unschooling is legal in all states of USA, for example). No PE teacher can force a child to exercise against their will, no maths teacher can force a child to do homework, no principal can force a child to remove items of clothing.

It is Peter who is so esconced in his bubble that he cannot imagine anything different. There are good schools and good teachers, and children generally enjoy school (50% in the survey discussed on a couple of articles back profess to liking school "all the time" and "many times".

I hope this post goes some way to clarifying my stance on the questions you asked.

We're getting somewhere. But to say that nobody is forced to attend to school is plainly false. (Please identify the state that allows the child to decide whether or not he or she attends school.) It's easy to define coercion in such a way that nothing short of compulsion at gunpoint would qualify. But I don't think most people understand the term that way, and it's clear that Peter is not using it that way, so, again, you are not responding to the actual points that Peter is making.

I don't know what grade you teach -- but are detentions given in your school system? Are children disciplined for failure to obey the school rules? If the answer is yes, then your school system is coercive. You can defend the coercion, but you can't deny that it's there.

For what it's worth, I never experienced gym class (or any other class, for that matter) as voluntary on my part. Now you tell me!

"Yes it is. Nobody is forced to attend school (unschooling is legal in all states of USA, for example). No PE teacher can force a child to exercise against their will, no maths teacher can force a child to do homework, no principal can force a child to remove items of clothing."

From past experience, I realize it is pointless to argue or even try to discuss things reasonably with Steve. He is not reasonable on this board, even though he claims to be in real life. I'm not responding to him directly (and will not comment on whatever he decides to counter with, which is usually just more of the same). I am, however, responding to some erroneous comments he made.

School attendance is compulsory in almost every country. I realize wikipedia is not an authoritative source, but it is speedy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_education

"Schooling is compulsory for all children in the United States, but the age range for which school attendance is required varies from state to state. Some states allow students to leave school between 14–17 with parental permission, before finishing high school; other states require students to stay in school until age 18.[15]"

Unschooling is a method of homeschooling. Homeschooling is what is legal in most states, but not all. Some parents in some states have to set up their own private schools or "attend" other private schools in order to have their children learn at home. It's not a given, either, that a family will be allowed to continue to homeschool their children if the state decides to intervene. And the child is totally at the mercy of his or her parents in terms of whether or not he can learn at home. It's not the child's choice... it's the parent's. If a parent is not willing to home educate their child, then it doesn't matter what the child wants, the child will have to attend school because attendance is required by law. It's compulsory.

In the not so distant past, parents have been jailed for homeschooling their kids. Same laws. Different interpretations.

And private schools are still schools.

PE coercion. I have personally witnessed children being coerced to participate in physical education classes. I have seen privileges and access to other activities revoked after a child would not willingly join in. I have seen children belittled and shamed in front of their peers for their non-participation. I have seen children sent to the office for refusing to participate. All these very common adult actions are punitive and are meted out due to maintain compliance in a coercive system. I have seen sick or asthmatic children be made to run around a gymnasium simply because their parent forgot to sent a note, even though it was clear from the wheezing that the child should not be participating that day. In one instance, an asthmatic child I know of was made to run laps in gym and subsequently ended up in hospital with a full-blown asthma attack. The majority of children in a school environment are compliant (and conflict-avoiding), responsive to intimidation, and will do as they are told by an adult in power, even if it is against their best interests.

A child who doesn't do their homework is in danger of facing serious consequences - failure, trouble at home, even suspension from school. A child who is asked to remove an offending article of clothing and refuses to comply is suspended, even at a young age, and cannot return until they are compliant (so coercion then becomes the responsibility of the parent).

Sure, a child can assert his or her independence and not run laps or do homework or wear "appropriate" clothing to school. But to assert oneself in the school environment will result in a punishing consequence, the degree of which is determined only by the in-power adult's capacity for compassion and self-control, as well as their personal philosophy around discipline.

Here's a stunning video that brings home that point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ae-6Ec_5G1g

This principal clearly thought it was okay and reasonable to react this way to this kid's demonstration of non-compliance. He also knew the cameras were there.

I've witnessed teachers pulling children's hair, pinching them, grabbing them, screaming at them, and kicking them in order to get compliance (over relatively minor and inconsequential issues). A teacher I know about duct taped a child's ankles to his chair (and the teacher was disciplined). If those actions on the part of typically caring and reasonable adults aren't the result of working in a coercive environment, then I think we have a different understanding of what coercion is.

And the stats about liking school are not accurate.

For the full picture of what Steve's referring to: School Satisfaction Survey

Please don't think that because I disagree strongly to misleading comments like "school is compulsory", that I am unreasonable.

Thank you for taking time to respond, anyway. Unfortunately your facts are awry: You say:

"School attendance is compulsory in almost every country."

While parents are forced not to neglect their child's right to an education, school is not compulsory. Please check out this excellent and informative article abut how school is not compulsory:

http://www.education-otherwise.org/Legal/SummLawEng&Wls.pdf

Could you comment on it, Rebecca? I am also curious to know which US states homeschooling is illegal in, as I thought it was legal in all US states, and unschooling is an acceptible form of homeschooling. I am only going on information posted by a homeschooler on this blog, and I am quite happy to concede if I am wrong.

Regarding malpractice in schools, I agree that malpractice goes on in schools. I would be an idiot to deny it. But malpractice also goes on in homeschool, doesn't it? Here's a stunning set of links that bring home the point:

Now I'm not daft enough to conclude that homeschooling is a bad thing as a result of specific examples. It is not sensible to make hasty generalisations from specific circumstances. Do you get my point?

And thanks for the link to the survey. What is it that is inaccurate about my assertion that 50% of kids liked school "all the time" or "many times"?

I am not unreasonable, Rebecca, I agree with many of Peter Gray's thoughts on free education. What I disagree with is his constant lambasting of state schools, comparing them with prisons, indicting them for ADHD diagnoses in kids, calling them coersive.

There are many good people in schools, and many well loved schools. There are surely problems, but there are also going to be problems with "free education"

We're simply going to get nowhere until he stops making emotive and misleading comments, such as "coersive education" "prison school" etc.

I teach in schools, Rebecca, I can see good in schools (plenty of bad, but also plenty of good. Schools can be a safe haven for many kids, a source of inspiration and liberty for many kids. Schools can be creative and exciting places for kids to be.

My own children's school is a great school. My own kids are not "forced to sit quietly" and "listen to things that don't interest them"

I do not force kids in my classes to do anything they don't want to do. Simply because I am arguing against Peter's misleading portrait of schools, it does not make me unreasonable.

If I come across as defensive, or aggressive, please forgive me. However I cannot sit by and listen to Peter make broad comments about
schools which I know are not true

Look Steve,
I undertand that you disagree with Peter's viewpoint. You've made that very clear. As for whether or not schools are a prison state. I guess that really depends on where you go to school. I went to an excellent (on paper) school that sent 80% of it's graduates onto higher education. I grew up in the deep South and that was far better than most of the schools in the state. Many of the students went on to Ivy league schools. I was one of them.
However, every morning, we had to cross through metal detectors, have our bags searched and were subject to "spontaneous searches". After 8 am, all but two entrance points of the school were chained closed to prevent "intruders" from coming in - it also prevented us from leaving. This made student on student violence inescapable. Some of teachers were amazing people with a true love for their work and a desire to help kids, others should have gone to work for the DMV - most were somewhere in between. We had no choice as to who we got for teachers. We were assigned to classes and classrooms and moved around according to the buzzer or bell. Does this sound like prison to you? We had to stay until we were 16. Many left when the opportunity arose. I visited my old school last year, not much has changed in the 20 years in the 20 years since I was last there.
The point is, some places have great, safe schools with shiny, happy teachers and budget money to match, others have 30+ kids in a classroom and 15 year old books, and zero support from the community or the administration. Most are someplace in between. None of them are really set up for kids who can't conform to the "print learner" model. And with exception of Montessori and Waldorf schools I've never seen a school that will allow children to get up and walk around the classroom regardless of what else is going on. So yes, kids are being "coerced" to sit down and stay seated. Because in order for the current model to work, they MUST. Coersion may be the "red card" system, which my daughter lived in terror of, the classroom store where kids get "bucks" for good behavior and can buy goodies to ring home, or the "penny jar" where good behavior brings a pizza or ice cream party. But it is still coersion.
Suzanne

"The point is, some places have great, safe schools with shiny, happy teachers and budget money to match, others have 30+ kids in a classroom and 15 year old books, and zero support from the community or the administration. Most are someplace in between."

You are clearly a teacher who loves his work and strives to help his students. I can understand why you would react to the strong statements that Peter makes as though they were personal attacks on you and other good-hearted, competent adults involved in public education. I have to say, though, that I feel you are largely missing the point of this blog. I think the central point is that kids are designed by evolution to be self-educating, and that the public school system is a largely inadequate one in which kids are most often denied this basic right. Do you agree with these central tenets? If so, what would you suggest as a solution? Peter has suggested the wider availability of free schools such as Sudbury Valley, or the creation of publicly funded neighborhood learning centers. These both sound like good, practical solutions to me.

Personally, I did well in public school for a number of years. I even enjoyed some of my years in school. I did reach a point at which I couldn't stand the debilitatingly cruel social environment of middle school, and then I was moved to a private school at which I continued to excel academically. I would never say, though, that as a kid I felt I had freedom of choice about whether to attend school and what to do while I was there. Sometimes I was given options (as in "you can work on this assignment right now or on that one"), but I knew I had to go to school and I had to get my work done or I would lose privileges and have to face the wrath of angry adults (a prospect I found overwhelmingly frightening). Also, it wasn't until I was about 14 that I began to understand the supposed purpose of my education. I was often told by adults that this was all for my own good, but I didn't have the foresight as a young child, of course, to really understand what that meant. Until I developed that kind of foresight, the whole school experience was entirely coercive for me.

Personally, I don't think any human being has the right to force, intimidate, or bribe another into any action unless they are doing so in order to protect themselves or another from harm. I certainly don't think it's right for a whole class of people (adults) to be forcing another whole class of people (children) to attend school supposedly "for their own good," whether it is ultimately helpful to the children or not. That, to me, is the fundamental issue here. A publicly funded, completely voluntary school system would receive my full support. What do I mean by voluntary? I mean the children have the right to choose wether or not to attend on any given day or at any given time, who their teachers are, what activities they will participate in at any given moment, and what rules they have to abide by in order to be allowed to attend. In other words, a Sudbury School. You can't honestly tell me that the kids in your classes enjoy this kind of freedom of choice, can you?

"I think the central point is that kids are designed by evolution to be self-educating..."

Yes, we may have evolved to learn effectively alone, but have also evolved to learn effectively in groups, and who's to say we have not evolved to learn effectively in groups which have leaders?

Good teachers (and there are many) are experienced in leading groups, and have expert knowledge of their field.

Would you really like your children to self-educate crossing the road, or driving, or swimming?

GOod teachers aim for autonomy of learning and ownership of work by the children. We have known and done this for years.

"...that the public school system is a largely inadequate one in which kids are most often denied this basic right. "

Yes, I'm afraid this is also untrue.

Peter is largely misrepresenting state schools, I'm afraid. He really needs to go into a few and then publish his findings

I agree, no group of people should be able to "force, intimidate, or bribe" others. But then again, it is not my experience of teachers or teaching.

"A publicly funded, completely voluntary school system would receive my full support."

Mine too :)

Steve

Steve

We are designed "by evolution". Do you agree with these central tenets? If so, what would you suggest as a solution? Peter has suggested the wider availability of free schools such as Sudbury Valley, or the creation of publicly funded neighborhood learning centers. These both sound like good, practical solutions to me.

**"I think the central point is that kids are designed by evolution to be self-educating..."**

"Yes, we may have evolved to learn effectively alone, but have also evolved to learn effectively in groups, and who's to say we have not evolved to learn effectively in groups which have leaders?"

Well that was a big leap. She didn't say kids evolved to learn alone. That's got to be one of the silliest things I've ever heard! From the moment a baby comes out of the womb, it is learning and nurtured by its parent/s.

In any group dynamic there are leaders, that is natural human behavior. What isn't natural is this:

"Good teachers (and there are many) are experienced in leading groups, and have expert knowledge of their field."

If by experts in their field, you mean, teachers are experts at teaching and leading groups, then sure, for the most part most teachers do their job well. That is what they get taught in school, to manage large groups of children, and implement structured lessons in a formal school environment.

Teaching isn't even remotely the same thing as learning though, so don't confuse that! Nor does it necessarily equate with educating, even IF that is the intended goal.

"Peter is largely misrepresenting state schools, I'm afraid. He really needs to go into a few and then publish his findings"

Or maybe you have been in school too long, you don't remember what it's like to NOT be in school. Once you've been deschooled for a while, you could come back with your findings.

"While parents are forced not to neglect their child's right to an education, school is not compulsory. Please check out this excellent and informative article abut how school is not compulsory:"

I know that I've brought this to your attention in the past, yet you continue with this, but there is a difference between compulsory education and compulsory attendance. In the US it is compulsory school attendance. You can argue all you want that it isn't, but the laws all clearly read that way.

"I am also curious to know which US states homeschooling is illegal in, as I thought it was legal in all US states, and unschooling is an acceptible form of homeschooling."

There are no laws written regarding homeschooling in California. It is not a legal option there. There is at least one other state where that is the case as well, but it's a new law and I can't remember which one, N. Dakota maybe.

Also, unschooling is not an acceptible form of homeschooling in some places because of the legal requirements involved in homeschooling. Some states make it VERY difficult to homeschool, some states require teaching credentials to homeschool, or a college degree, or a curriculum approved by the state, it varies.

The pdf you share is applies only to those in England and Wales, it has no relevance to the legal requirements for education in the USA. Every state had Compulsory Attendance Laws by 1918: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0112617.html

School attendance *IS* required/forced/compulsory/coerced/- your child attends school, or there are very real consequences. Even homeschooling requires that you prove certain things to the states satisfaction, or that are legally allowed to force your child to attend school. Failure to comply with attendance laws is a misdemeanor in every state, and can be upgraded to a felony- if you do not go to school, you are a criminal. http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/compulsory-education

By saying that attendance is not compulsory, you are telling an outright falsehood- whether these attendance laws actually serve children, is another discussion entirely.

"ADHD is a real and serious, often debilitating condition. It is not simply about naughty kids in school. Please check out this article, which details how genuine ADHD sufferers have "deficits in the brain's reward system""

Here's something to consider:

"The DSM used to categorise homosexuality as a disease. Many psychiatrists subscribed to this 'belief'. The later DSM removed homosexuality by consensus just as they added ADHD by consensus." ~Barry Turner (university lecturer in the UK teaching on issues in mental health and medical ethics as well as research methodologies and ethics in psychology and criminology)

He also says this:

"ADHD is not a diagnosis, legitimate or otherwise PERIOD! A diagnosis is reached after examining symptoms and carrying out appropriate tests by reference to a known aetiology. ADHD has no universally accepted aetiology and there are no tests for it short of a tick box classification based often on second hand subjective value judgements on what is normal behaviour. Therefore there is no diagnostic formulation. It is highly unusual and deeply disturbing that some of this "diagnosis" is not carried out by medical professionals at all. Many of the children who have had this condition inflicted upon them have had it done by schoolteachers and teaching assistants whose knowledge of the subject has been gleaned from cod psychology articles in the plethora of "health" magazines to be found in the newsagent. In many cases that is the sum of the scientific basis for this "diagnosis".

The DSM is not the standard diagnostic model, it is only relevant to members of a club known as the American Psychiatric Association and the only reason many medical professionals mistakenly follow it is because it is fashionable and well marketed, not because it has any intrinsic scientific credibility."

Clearly Peter is not the only one who sees that teachers play a BIG role in diagnosis of ADHD. The title of Peter's article is very much on point. Questioning whether or not school accounts for normalcy is needed. The status quo, and as another commenter said, "group think", should always be questioned.